« News: David Campos, Rainbow Flag, Amy Balliett, OJ, John Waters |
Main
| Robert Pattinson and the Little Ashes Trailer »
12/05/2008
Towleroad Guide to the Tube #400
THE FUTURE: As IBM sees it.
DANA PERINO: Debunker.
MIKE HUCKABEE: Clarifies his remarks on The View that gays haven't crossed the civil rights violence threshold.
SAVE THE SPUR: A mini-doc on the recent action to save a major portion of New York's newest major public outdoor space.
Check out our previous guides to the Tube here.
Posted 4:30 PM EST by Andy Towle in George W. Bush, Mike Huckabee, New York, News, Towleroad Guide to the Tube | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The interviewer should have pointed out that the woman with a cross had just attacked a man in a wheelchair.
Not that it would have made a bit of difference to a piece of shit like Huckabee, but it needs to be put on the record again and again and again.
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Dec 5, 2008 4:42:02 PM
We all need to be as forthright as Huckabee when it comes to our stand against the Radical Religious Extremists in this country. The time of playing nice, sweet, "we are a gentle peaceful people" has come to an end. Time to show some Balls and Boobs (both if you got um) and call this monsters what they are; to their face. We shall overcome.
Posted by: Sargon Bighorn | Dec 5, 2008 4:55:01 PM
Huckabee repeats the misconception that hate crime enhancements are about punishing thought. They are not, they are about punishing more harshly those who strike terror in their fellow citizens. A tagger who paints "Kill the Jews" on the wall of a Synagogue deserves more punishment than a tagger who paints his initials on the wall of a school IMHO.
Posted by: Tom Larsen | Dec 5, 2008 5:09:55 PM
@Tom Larsen:
Exactly! Huckabee actually, without knowing it, made an argument FOR hate crime legislation (and made himself look stupid, again).
He said punishment should be proportional to the harm done. That's exactly why hate crimes are punished more harshly, because they're not about hurting one person, they are about terrorizing an entire group. Simply put, they cause more harm to society.
Posted by: Eshto | Dec 5, 2008 5:30:10 PM
And did anyone catch the statement that someone can't help the color of their skin? As if to say we CAN help our sexual orientation??
The ignorance astounds me.
Posted by: BD1421 | Dec 5, 2008 6:34:43 PM
Not to mention the clear racism in a statement that people "CAN'T HELP the color of their skin" as if to say that we have to recognize the evils of racism because those
"coloreds" can't help it that they are "colored", as if they would, or would want to, "help it" if they could.
Huckabee is just another silver tongued Southern bigot preacher. I grew up surrounded by them.
Posted by: Zeke | Dec 5, 2008 9:10:23 PM
His stupidity knows no bound. His answer goes against everything our entire criminal system is based on. There is a difference legally and punitively between Murder and Manslaughter. That difference is malice and intent. A man who coldly mows down his estranged wife with his car should not be treated the same way as a driver who loses control of his car and kills a pedestrian. In Huckabee's world they are the same because we "shouldn't judge people's thoughts."
Posted by: loki7329 | Dec 5, 2008 10:20:07 PM
So it is alright to beat someone to death if I THINK that person is gay and thus a threat to my existence? According to Huckabee, the government does not have the right to monitor thoughts that lead to terrible actions. According to him, since gays can control their sexual orientation. But since we decide no to, we deserve what we get?
Posted by: 2nd Class Citizen | Dec 5, 2008 11:45:06 PM
So, if we follow Huckabee's logic, the 9/11 hijackers were just guilty of murder...
And Al Qieda (sp?) are just a "gang"...
You see, Hate Crimes are a form of Terrorism, pure and simple.
Posted by: Mike | Dec 6, 2008 9:12:25 AM
I'm so happy people here defend the purpose of Hate Crimes legislation.
I am puzzled as to why it gets lost in the larger basic conversation.
With the exception of groups who have been targeted by hate crimes, most television, radio and news reports really do seem to subscribe to the impression that this type of proposed legislation is thought control. It is the opposite of thought control.
It is holding accountable, those who send a message of fear and terror to a much larger audience by the actions they commit on an individual or single entity.
Hate Crimes legislations should not be controversial. The actions of the German National Socialists in the 30s and 40s should be reason enough to embrace any proposed Hate Crimes legislation.
It really leaves me puzzled that the greater public doesn't see this.
Posted by: Dave | Dec 6, 2008 1:51:39 PM
I didn't even realize that Christians had lost their civil rights in this country at some point. Thanks to "Huck" the fat fuck for clearing that up.
He's a weasel and he successfully changed the topic several times in a very brief conversation.
As for the hate crime issue, I don't know of any crime committed that isn't hateful and terrifying to the victim (as well as their neighbors, family, friends and peers). The only way to deal with crime is to enforce strong punishment for ALL acts which are committed against any victim, whomever they may be.
A lot of time and resources could be freed up by decriminalizing victimless "crimes" like prostitution and drug use.
Btw...why doesn't someone ask Huck where he and his obese herd stand on the sins of gluttony and greed?
Posted by: paul c | Dec 6, 2008 3:08:12 PM
But where can I get one of those way cool TEAM HUCK jackets?!
Posted by: derrysf | Dec 7, 2008 2:43:36 PM